Trial reportJAMA2017
Effect of Physician Notification Regarding Nonadherence to Colorectal Cancer Screening on Patient Participation in Fecal Immunochemical Test Cancer Screening: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02515344 (Impact of the Distribution to Attending Physicians of a Nominative List of Their Patients Not Participating in the Organised Screening of Colorectal Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Impact of the Distribution to Attending Physicians of a Nominative List of Their Patients Not Participating in the Organised Screening of Colorectal Cancer: Randomised Study Measuring the Impact on Participation
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- Primary care practice-based interventions and their effect on participation in population-based cancer screening programs: a systematic narrative review.Primary health care research & development · 2024Pooled it
- Selection of patients for large mailed fecal immunochemical test colorectal cancer screening outreach programs: A systematic review.Journal of medical screening · 2021Pooled it
- Effect of a Feedback Visit and a Clinical Decision Support System Based on Antibiotic Prescription Audit in Primary Care: Multiarm Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Effect of an Automated Patient Dashboard Using Active Choice and Peer Comparison Performance Feedback to Physicians on Statin Prescribing: The PRESCRIBE Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2018Trial
- Inter-physician heterogeneity in colorectal cancer screening participation in France: a study based on the French National Health Data System.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of health promotion interventions to increase faecal occult blood test uptake rates among older adults with an average-risk of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Article
- Co-designing a general practice-led intervention and implementation strategy to increase bowel cancer screening through general practice: a qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Why is early detection of colon cancer still not possible in 2023?World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Review
- Colorectal cancer screening completion by patients due or overdue for screening after reminders: a retrospective study.BMC cancer · 2023Article
- Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review of the Current Situation and Screening in North and Central Asian Countries.Cureus · 2023Review
- Breast cancer: a randomized controlled trial assessing the effect of a decision aid on mammography screening uptake: study protocol.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Cervical cancer screening uptake: A randomized controlled trial assessing the effect of sending invitation letters to non-adherent women combined with sending their general practitioners a list of their non-adherent patients (study protocol).Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- High Rate of Inappropriate Fecal Immunochemical Testing at a Large Veterans Affairs Health Care System.Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS · 2021Article
- Screening Status as a Determinant of Choice of Colorectal Cancer Screening Method: A Population-Based Informed Survey.Gastrointestinal tumors · 2021Article
- LncRNA HOTAIR recruits SNAIL to inhibit the transcription of HNF4α and promote the viability, migration, invasion and EMT of colorectal cancer.Translational oncology · 2021Article
- What Multilevel Interventions Do We Need to Increase the Colorectal Cancer Screening Rate to 80%?Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2021Review
- Characteristics and attitudes of first round invitees in the Irish National Colorectal Cancer Screening Programme.Frontline gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Strategies to Improve Persistent Adherence in Colorectal Cancer Screening.Gut and liver · 2020Review
- Pathologic Factors Affecting Colorectal Cancer Survival in a Jamaican Population-the UHWI Experience.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Increasing participation in fecal screening tests is a major challenge in countries that have implemented colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs. Objective: To determine whether providing general practitioners (GPs) a list of patients who are nonadherent to CRC screening enhances patient participation in fecal immunochemical testing (FIT). Design, Setting, and Participants: A 3-group, cluster-randomized study was conducted from July 14, 2015, to July 14, 2016, on the west coast of France, with GPs in 801 practices participating and involving adult patients (50-74 years) who were at average risk of CRC and not up-to-date with CRC screening. The final follow-up date was July 14, 2016. Interventions: General practitioners were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: 496 received a list of patients who had not undergone CRC screening (patient-specific reminders group, 10 476 patients), 495 received a letter describing region-specific CRC screening adherence rates (generic reminders group, 10 606 patients), and 455 did not receive any reminders (usual care group, 10 147 patients). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was patient participation in CRC screening 1 year after the intervention. Results: Among 1482 randomized GPs (mean age, 53.4 years; 576 women [38.9%]), 1446 participated; of the 33 044 patients of these GPs (mean age, 59.7 years; 17 949 women [54.3%]), follow-up at 1 year was available for 31 229 (94.5%). At 1 year, 24.8% (95% CI, 23.4%-26.2%) of patients in the specific reminders group, 21.7% (95% CI, 20.5%-22.8%) in the generic reminders group, and 20.6% (95% CI, 19.3%-21.8%) in the usual care group participated in the FIT screening. The between-group differences were 3.1% (95% CI, 1.3%-5.0%) for the patient-specific reminders group vs the generic reminders group, 4.2% (95% CI, 2.3%-6.2%) for the patient-specific reminders group vs the usual care group, and 1.1% (95% CI, -0.6% to 2.8%) for generic reminders group vs the usual care group. Conclusions and Relevance: Providing French GPs caring for adults at average risk of CRC with a list of their patients who were not up-to-date with their CRC screening resulted in a small but significant increase in patient participation in FIT screening at 1 year compared with patients who received usual care. Providing GPs with generic reminders about regional rates of CRC screening did not increase screening rates compared with usual care. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02515344.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.